I've watched all the Stanley Kubrick movies. How do I cope now?

I would like to hear your criticism of those films.
Watch other films. There are dozens of great directors out there.

have you tried try having sex?

Watch all of Villenueve's films.

Please name some. Kubrick has only ever done masterpieces. Several of his movies I expected to be boring because of their premises but I ended up loving them. I can't imagine other directors with such perfect track records.

Nice Bait

Watch Death Note and Code Geass

How do I get this look?

I disagree with you completely. I don't think he only made masterpieces. I would say that Barry Lyndon, 2001 and EWS coul be considered as masterpieces or great films. Rest is very good or good. Killer's Kiss and Fear and Desire are bad so he did make bad films. Tarkovsky in my opinion never made a bad film. I prefer him to Kubrick.
So here are some other great directors: John Ford, Howard Hawks, Ernest Lubitsch, Billy Wilder, Frank Capra, Douglas Sirk, Alfred Hitchcock, F.W.Murnau, Fritz Lang, Charlie Chaplin, Buster Keaton, Andrei Tarkovsky, Sergei Eisenstein, Vittorio De Sica, Michelangelo Antonioni, Luchino Visconti, Federico Fellini, Jean Pierre Menville, Robert Bresson, Eric Rohmer, Jacques Rivette, Chris Marker, Alain Resnais, Bela Tarr, Theodoros Angelopoulos, Satyajit Ray, Akira Kurosawa, Kenji Mizoguchi, Yasujirô Ozu, Carl Theodor Dreyer, František Vláčil etc. I'm only scratching the surface here there are many other great directors.

>Why do you think FMJ is shit?
Bipartite dreck that hinges on Kubrick's smittenness with R. Lee Ermey and presents an embarassingly bad take on the absurdity of war. Twilight's Last Gleaming did it better. Only with words. In passing, without even focusing on it. In two minutes.

>What about 2001?
Style-over-substance shit that does little to Science Fiction and/or cinematography.

>What about Dr Strangelove?
Brainlet flick. Basically, a brutally dishonest reading of Kahn's "On Thermonuclear War", missing all the main points.

>What about Paths of Glory?
I won't even go into that. Holy shit, was it bad.

I've watched death note. Would have been perfect if it ended before the last story arc.

I'm watching code geass, not too impressed right now. It's too cliche and episodic.

see

>Style-over-substance shit that does little to Science Fiction and/or cinematography.
Haha

Can you reduce your list to 2 or 3 directors? I'd like to get into movies not made by or for american/british audiences.

You go and watch The Duellists because it's better than Barry Lyndon.

there's nothing in common between these two movies

>I won't even go into that. Holy shit, was it bad.

It literally has the greatest detournement in film history. Take your shit opinions back to /r/movies.

No, I'm serious about this. The iconographic minimalism of the film baits people into thinking that this is some kind of revolutionary new idea. It is not. Space is barren. The space scenes were badly lighted, and the interior scenes were nothing more than 1950s futuristic furniture design jerk-off.

It had no merit whatsoever. It was smart at some points, but very ostentatiously so. The whole film breathes the yearning of an intellectual for admiration.

I, for one, despise that.

Pseud.

pseud

Jean Pierre Melville makes quite good and accessible films. Ingmar Bergman is a good access point if you want to get into arthouse films. He has lot of short films. Luchino Visconti for Italian cinema, mix of epic films and some neorealism.

Meant to type denouement.

If the final five minutes of Path of Glory don't stir the very depths of your soul then you don't have one.

Thanks user.

You watch the movies of an actual good director like Fritz Lang

You are welcome.

>Style-over-substance shit that does little to Science Fiction and/or cinematography.
confirmed b8

Depends on how you liked 2001 and Barry Lyndon tbqh.